Development of an Interprofessional Diabetes and Oral Hygiene Education Program for Youth with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

MacDonald, Laura; Aylward, Nicole; Sellers, Elizabeth; Sloshower, Sheryl; Dean, Heather

doi:10.1016/j.jcjd.2012.09.001

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Female gender was one of the considerable variables affecting patients' self-reported practice, which disagreed with the finding reported from Iran. (15) The present study showed an improvement in the oral health knowledge following the oral health program, which was in accordance with several studies, (32,33) Improvement in the oral health self-reported practice regarding teeth and their cleaning methods and regarding dental visits was observed in the present study. This was supported by another Iranian study.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Oral Health in Adults with Diabetes: Oral Health Conditions, Knowledge and Practice Following an Oral Health Educational Program

El-Ashkar

Gad

El-Borgy

et al. 2019

Journal of High Institute of Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Diabetes mellitus is a risk factor for impaired oral health. Oral health knowledge is lacking among patients with diabetes. Objective(s): The objectives of the study were to assess the oral health condition of patients with controlled and uncontrolled diabetes, to assess knowledge and practice of patients with diabetes concerning oral health and to construct, implement and evaluate the impact of an educational program for patients with diabetes on their oral health, their knowledge and self-reported practice regarding oral health. Methods: A sample of 200 adult patients with diabetes mellitus attending two hospitals in Alexandria was included in the study. In phase 1, a cross sectional design was used and assessment of the patients' diabetes control, their oral health condition, knowledge and self-reported practice was carried out. In phase 2, an educational oral health intervention program was constructed and its effect on the patients' oral health condition, knowledge and self-reported practice was done. Results: Most patients with diabetes had unsatisfactory glycemic control, 27.5% had good knowledge, while 75% had poor oral health practice. The oral health condition of patients with satisfactory diabetes control was relatively better than those with unsatisfactory control. The knowledge score, practice, gingivitis, plaque and calculus indices improved after the intervention Conclusion: Better glycemic control is associated with better oral health conditions. Patients with diabetes had insufficient oral health knowledge and poor practice. The educational program improved their knowledge and practice, while some parameters of oral health improved.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Oral Health in Adults with Diabetes: Oral Health Conditions, Knowledge and Practice Following an Oral Health Educational Program

El-Ashkar

Gad

El-Borgy

et al. 2019

Journal of High Institute of Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There is an explanation for that as persistent hyperglycemia stimulates proinflammatory cytokines production such as IL-6 which is producedby the human gingival fibroblasts (28). Also, in T2DM oral hygiene conditions may impact inflammatory markers and consequently cause periimplantitis (29). Our results agreed withthe meta-analysis by Lagunovet al who indicated a significant rise in BOP and PD when comparing the controlled T2DM (HbA1C 6.1%-8%) to healthy individuals in 4 studies (30).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Evaluation of Stability and Crestal Bone Changes Around Implants Placed at Crestal Versus Subcrestal Level in Controlled Type Two Diabetic Patients

Elserity,

Khalil,

Talaab

et al. 2023

Alexandria Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODUCTION:Peri-implant bone level preservationis the key to maintainingperi-implant soft tissue and stability.Many studies have discussed the role of placing dental implants at various depths on crestal bone loss, but they were debatable. OBJECTIVES: To compare clinically and radiographically the effect of placing implants atcrestal versus subcrestal levels on the crestal bone lossand stability evaluation in controlled type 2diabetic patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 22 controlleddiabetic patients were randomized accordingto placement depth (group I: 11 implants were placed equicrestally) (groupⅡ: 11implants were placed 1mm subcrestally). Stability of implants, clinical and radiographical assessment were done for both groups. RESULTS: 19 implants were included in our study (10 crestal and 9 subcrestal). There were no statistically significant differences in bleeding index and probing depth between the 2 groups while plaque index was greateramong subcrestal group. Crestal bone loss mesiodistally was significantly higherin crestal group, whilethere was no significant difference buccolingually between crestal and subcrestal groups. Stabilityvalues weresignificantly greater in subcrestal group at loading time. CONCLUSION: Sub-crestal implant placement is preferable for controlled type 2 diabetic patients as it decreases the probability of implant thread exposureprovided that careful oral hygiene care is followed and regular periodic checks to maintain periimplantsoft tissue and dental bone health.

show abstract

“…Oral hygiene status could influence inflammatory parameters and a higher incidence of peri‐implantitis in T2DM individuals . In the present review, only one of the seven studies did not mention the use of chlorhexidine rinse at the time of the placement of the implants, as well as a systemic antibiotic treatment, to reduce any post‐surgical complications .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Evaluation of biologic implant success parameters in type 2 diabetic glycemic control patients versus healthy patients: A meta‐analysis

Lagunov

Sun

George

2019

J of Invest & Clin Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim The aim of the present systematic literature review was to evaluate bleeding on probing (BOP), pocket depth (PD), and marginal bone loss (MBL) in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) control patients. Methods An electronic literature search was conducted through PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, Embase, and ScienceDirect. The search included prospective human clinical studies that analyzed the success of dental implants in T2DM control patients. For inclusion, studies should have had a minimum of 1‐year follow up and should have assessed the following parameters: MBL, BOP and PD. Prior to meta‐analysis, all of the studies were assessed for quality, bias, and heterogeneity. Results Risk of bias analysis indicated that all studies were of moderate quality. After a full‐text evaluation, only seven studies met the inclusion criteria for this meta‐analysis, with a combined total of 443 patients and 530 dental implants. The meta‐analysis indicated a statistically significant difference between parameters of implants placed in the glycemic‐controlled group and healthy group in MBL (P < .001), BOP (P < .04), and PD (P < .001). Conclusion The results of the present study indicated that, despite being glycemic controlled, patients with T2DM were associated with a higher risk of peri‐implant disease.

show abstract

Development of an Interprofessional Diabetes and Oral Hygiene Education Program for Youth with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Cited by 4 publications

References 14 publications

Oral Health in Adults with Diabetes: Oral Health Conditions, Knowledge and Practice Following an Oral Health Educational Program

Oral Health in Adults with Diabetes: Oral Health Conditions, Knowledge and Practice Following an Oral Health Educational Program

Evaluation of Stability and Crestal Bone Changes Around Implants Placed at Crestal Versus Subcrestal Level in Controlled Type Two Diabetic Patients

Evaluation of biologic implant success parameters in type 2 diabetic glycemic control patients versus healthy patients: A meta‐analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About